View Poll Results: Does the domination of the presidency by certain families bother you?

Voters
139. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    69 49.64%
  • No

    70 50.36%
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 36

Thread: American Royalty

  1. #11
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    The anals of history
    Last Seen
    07-25-15 @ 02:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    10,348

    Re: American Royalty

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Incognito View Post
    It's not royalty, it's oligarchy.
    Congratulations, you're THAT GUY.

    Anyway, for the record, I didn't say the Bush's or Clinton's were royalty. I said they were "royalty in all but title," which is accurate.

  2. #12
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    The anals of history
    Last Seen
    07-25-15 @ 02:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    10,348

    Re: American Royalty

    Quote Originally Posted by Threegoofs View Post
    It bothers me. It's a fault with the system.

    That's why I really appreciate a guy like Obama- who really is about as self-made as anyone.
    In this context and compared to his predecessors and likely successor, I suppose you're right. The caveat, though, is by normal standards, Obama is hardly "self-made." He was handpicked by the democratic elite from the time he ran for senator.

  3. #13
    Sage
    Guy Incognito's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Last Seen
    12-02-17 @ 07:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    11,216

    Re: American Royalty

    Quote Originally Posted by Peter Grimm View Post
    Congratulations, you're THAT GUY.

    Anyway, for the record, I didn't say the Bush's or Clinton's were royalty. I said they were "royalty in all but title," which is accurate.
    "Royalty in all but title" is a silly thing to say. Title is what makes it royalty. We have a word for "royalty in all but title."

  4. #14
    Guru
    celticwar17's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:19 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    4,889

    Re: American Royalty

    Honestly Jeb Bush doesn't bother me... He has different policies. I don't believe he is an establishment republican, he has some radical ideas that conflict with much of the party that crosses to the other side. I'm fully aware of all the ins and connections web that has made Jeb become a possible nominee... but so far, the choice would be one that the American People can honestly decide with his open campaign strategy.

    Clinton is a different story... in my opinion. She is an establishment democrat who's been beginning for this position for quite a long time, and she's been in Washington for quite a long time... she stinks of out of touch rich DC democrat culture. There are too many motives... too many schemers...a Hilary presidency would be a democratic party presidency.

    not that I like Jeb... lol

  5. #15
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    The anals of history
    Last Seen
    07-25-15 @ 02:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    10,348

    Re: American Royalty

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Incognito View Post
    "Royalty in all but title" is a silly thing to say. Title is what makes it royalty. We have a word for "royalty in all but title."
    Alright, this convo is sidetracking the main discussion so I'm gonna bow out. I'll just say that, while you might think "royalty in all but title" is a silly way to word the present situation in which we have essentially two dynastic families controlling the White House, it does fit the bill, and it's a hell of a lot punchier than saying "oligarchy."

    Esoteric words tend to disconnect your audience from your message: use simple-but-effective language whenever possible. My 2 cents. You're entitled to your opinion. Now let's get back on topic.

  6. #16
    Sage
    Guy Incognito's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Last Seen
    12-02-17 @ 07:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    11,216

    Re: American Royalty

    Quote Originally Posted by Peter Grimm View Post
    Alright, this convo is sidetracking the main discussion so I'm gonna bow out.
    Ok, I'm going to go start a thread about American Caesaropapism.

  7. #17
    Sage

    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Florida
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    23,358

    Re: American Royalty

    Quote Originally Posted by Peter Grimm View Post
    The dems appear all but certain to place Hillary Clinton on the presidential ticket. It's looking more likely every day that the Republicans will follow suit and place Jeb Bush on theirs.

    If that does happen as expected, then for the past quarter century our presidential order has been: Bush - Clinton - Bush - Obama - Bush OR Clinton.


    My question is.... does that bother you? It bothers me. Not as a Republican or Democrat, but just as an American. No matter who wins: Bush or Clinton.

    One of the defining things about America has always been the ideal that this is a meritocracy.... you attain high positions based on hard work, smarts, and determination. The whole "rags to riches" ideal, where any man or woman can rise from nothing to become something, I feel is under attack.

    If we choose, as a country, to go down the road of dynastic leadership, of familial rule, of royalty in all but title.... then don't we lose something that once made us who we are?

    Maybe it's only natural. After all, dynasties and royalty have been the norm in governments around the world for thousands of years. Maybe we are just gravitating back to our natural, base instincts as humans. But I hate to think that.

    Voice your opinion, please.
    Hillary is related to Bill Clinton by marriage only. The only dynasty is the Bush one. Let us pray we don't let another one of them get the Whitehouse. They are bad blood.

  8. #18
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    The anals of history
    Last Seen
    07-25-15 @ 02:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    10,348

    Re: American Royalty

    Quote Originally Posted by iguanaman View Post
    Hillary is related to Bill Clinton by marriage only. The only dynasty is the Bush one. Let us pray we don't let another one of them get the Whitehouse. They are bad blood.
    I think that's a stretch. Marrying in to royalty has historically been a path to the throne, so to speak. It doesn't make it any better.

    My main concern is this: Regardless of who wins (Bush or Clinton), does the belief in meritocracy diminish to a point where, say, a child growing up in this era says to himself/herself, "I could never be president, because I wasn't born a Bush, or I wasn't born a Clinton?"

    Do we lose that sense that everyone, no matter what situation they were born in to, has a shot at whatever they put their mind to, including the highest office in the land?

    Because that would be a loss for this country, indeed.

    I will say this about Barak Obama. While I'm not a fan of his politics, I do appreciate the fact that because he was able to rise to the office of president, now an entire race of young Americans can look to the White House and say to themselves, "That isn't beyond me. If I put my mind to it, maybe one day I could achieve something great too."

    I believe we need that.

  9. #19
    Sage
    Hatuey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    42,019

    Re: American Royalty

    Quote Originally Posted by KevinKohler View Post
    Apparently, all of these people are distantly related, too. Obama is like a distant cousin to Bush, and Clinton is related somehow to some other person, all from the 1600s, or something.


    In other words, a bunch of good ol boys from the good ol days are running things.
    Uh... if you are white/black and your family goes back more than 3 generations in this country, chances are that you have some relation to a president too. However, that relationship may be a cousin a few times removed. Hardly anything you could use to get further ahead. Obama is supposedly cousins with Bush... however in order to establish that connection you need to go back 11 generations and find some farmer in a colony. Fast forward 11 generations and you have Obama being raised by a lower middle class mother and Bush being the child of a well off family. Sure, they're subjectively related but how they reached the oval office is extremely different. So hardly "good ol boys".
    I refuse to accept the view that mankind is so tragically bound to the starless midnight of racism and war that the bright daybreak of peace and brotherhood can never become a reality. - MLK

  10. #20
    better late than pregnant
    Gonzo Rodeo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Here
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:03 PM
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    4,131

    Re: American Royalty

    Quote Originally Posted by iguanaman View Post
    Hillary is related to Bill Clinton by marriage only. The only dynasty is the Bush one. Let us pray we don't let another one of them get the Whitehouse. They are bad blood.
    Hilary's father was also involved in Chicago politics; one brother ran for a Senate seat in Florida; the other brother married Barbara Boxer's daughter.

    "Rodham" is its own minor royal house in American politics.
    "Political speech and writing are largely the defense of the indefensible. . . . Thus political language has to consist largely of euphemism, question-begging and sheer cloudy vagueness."
    ~Orwell, Politics and the English Language

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •